Odds and Sods:
News ToolsReg Shops |
Competition: Correct history with Google's News CommentsWrite retrospective PR - win a T-shirtPublished Friday 10th August 2007 15:44 GMT Summer Fun There's something about Google and news. Nothing brings out the autistic side of Google's corporate personality more than answering criticism about its handling of news material. Defending the service we see all the company's less attractive characteristics magnified: its utopian faith in the power of its algorithms, its cloth-eared obliviousness to objections, and its infantile and cloying belief that whatever it's doing is doing the world a huge favour. They're all there. Google News brings out yet another unsavoury characteristic too: the notion that whatever its algorithms may do, its staff are in no way responsible for them. It's thanks to your reporter that Google News today tags corporate Press Releases as such. When The Register first noticed that Google had introduced the practice of slipping PR matter into the news stream in 2003, the company at first said it didn't, then claimed it was a jolly good thing that we not only wanted, but actually needed. Since then, when faced with questions of systemic bias, Google has responded in a consistent way. It likes to claim that Huge, Ever Growing Pulsating Brain that's responsible for making these value judgement calls cannot be tampered with, and employees are merely there to polish the machines. Now, in the biggest development since the launch of the service, Google is to introduce a Comments facility to its Google News aggregator. It's a special kind of Comments section, however: only those "participants" in a story can respond. This is a particularly American answer to a specifically American "problem". After a promising start at the birth of the Republic, journalists grew weary of being beaten up by tycoons and magnates at every turn, and turned to the trappings of professionalism and to the Holy Grail of "objectivity" in defence. As Bruce Page wrote in The Murdoch Archipelago: "'Objective Journalism' was a specifically American outcome - an almost pedantic collating of alternative viewpoints with estimates of their relative values forbidden." This, Page noted, resulted in "a mechanistic 'objectivity' almost steganographic in character, with sheets of editorial boilerplate obscuring any gleam of judgement". Promising material for a computer scientist's algorithm, then, you'd think. Instead of "fixing the News", by perhaps producing some of its own, Google is offering to make the processes of reading non-news more mechanically efficient. It can't fail. To put this to the test, we've imagined how great moments in history may have looked if the Google News aggregator (with added Comments) was in operation. If you can do better, and you surely can, please submit an example by email (send email here). Extra points will be gained by presenting it with Google-News style HTML formatting, or as a "screengrab".
Now let's hear your "right to replies..." Click here to submit yours.
Track this type of story as a custom Atom/RSS feed or by email.
|
|
Top 20 stories • All The Week’s Headlines • Archive • Search